Jump to content

Understanding 8th w. tanks and shooting....


GriffonI92

Recommended Posts

So, not meant to be a grip and complain post but want to make sure I understand the rules clearly for 8th. 

 

My big confusion on reading through is that vehicles have 360 arc for shooting. So I can have my vindicator, back to the enemy, with an inch of tracks being able to see said enemy and still shoot my Demolisher Cannon? It personally makes the pivot and straight line restrictions for flyers kind of pointless as well.

 

This seems very un narrative....

 

 

 

So, not meant to be a grip and complain post but want to make sure I understand the rules clearly for 8th.

 

My big confusion on reading through is that vehicles have 360 arc for shooting. So I can have my vindicator, back to the enemy, with an inch of tracks being able to see said enemy and still shoot my Demolisher Cannon? It personally makes the pivot and straight line restrictions for flyers kind of pointless as well.

 

This seems very un narrative....

Assume the vehicle turns to shoot and then reverts back to starting position.

 

No one questions when infantry or monsters shoot backwards or sideways.

So, not meant to be a grip and complain post but want to make sure I understand the rules clearly for 8th. 

 

My big confusion on reading through is that vehicles have 360 arc for shooting. So I can have my vindicator, back to the enemy, with an inch of tracks being able to see said enemy and still shoot my Demolisher Cannon? It personally makes the pivot and straight line restrictions for flyers kind of pointless as well.

 

This seems very un narrative....

 

The vehicle. It has those tracks to enable itself to move and change location.

 

The vindicator drives, fires on the go, then retreats behind cover, you know, a tactic that is commonly used in tank warfare to avoid return fire. 

 

So the tracked vehicle being able to move in and direction is not believable, but you don't like that jet fighters have to move at a certain speed in a certain direction or they fall out of the sky?

 

It's very narrative.

It hasn't been FAQ'd, but for now I am playing vehicles as if they have facing as before. 

Not to be a dick, but what you play is irrelevant.

To answer the op,  the rules as they are now indeed remove the facing element so yes your example works.

Will it be Faq'd? Perhaps

For now it is not.

You may set up house rules as you wish, but the official rules are no facings.

The example given where essentially they are turning taking their shot and returning to their original position is valid for fluff, battle is never static. Movement is always happening.

It hasn't been FAQ'd, but for now I am playing vehicles as if they have facing as before.

Then you are playing a house rule. There are no facings and no fire arcs anymore.

 

It doesn't make flyers and the 90 pivot pointless. The point of that is not to restrict firing but to restrict movement.

This change was for the better. There's no more arguing with strict opponents or having discrepancies based on flyer or vehicle facing. It helps speed the game up immensely. The less talk/arguing and more dice rolling is healthier for the format.

 

Krash

This change was for the better. There's no more arguing with strict opponents or having discrepancies based on flyer or vehicle facing. It helps speed the game up immensely. The less talk/arguing and more dice rolling is healthier for the format.

 

Krash

 

So much this.

 

From a narrative standpoint, it also compresses the movement and shooting phases of the game.  Its not that your tank or flyer is moving and then shooting, its shooting while moving.  

Effectively the loss of facings and fire arcs is an extension of wobbly model syndrome. It speeds up gameplay and saves trying to squeeze that nicely painted model into a terrain piece such that the model gets damaged.

 

You can house rule fire arcs back in if you like, but that's not a topic for discussion in the OR.

The vehicle. It has those tracks to enable itself to move and change location.

 

The vindicator drives, fires on the go, then retreats behind cover, you know, a tactic that is commonly used in tank warfare to avoid return fire. 

 

So the tracked vehicle being able to move in and direction is not believable, but you don't like that jet fighters have to move at a certain speed in a certain direction or they fall out of the sky?

 

It's very narrative.

 

This. So much this. People are still wailing on that horse that is by now dead-er than Horus? :huh.:

 

http://www.thewarstore.com/media/GEG/GEGDMH028.jpg

 

Here, have some more HORSES FOR THE HORSE THRONE :rolleyes:

We're all about simplicity over realism right now. Come back in five to ten years and everyone will feel the opposite.

 

What realism? More like bloat from past 3 decades, if monstrous creature (especially laughable examples like Tau and Eldar that had no business not being walkers to begin with) can ignore vehicle restrictions and rules, then it's not realism, it's stealth penalty for taking vehicles...

The question's been asked, answered, and extensively commentaried.

 

We have other places at the B&C to debate on the suitability of simulationist vs. abstract rules sets for model conflict in the dark future. If you wish to continue along that line you will take it to one of them.

I didn't mean for that to come off snobish lol

 

Just want to see how the Codexs come out. Not going to burn my stuff or anything. haha

 

I did get a game in yesterday and it flowed really well. Just miss the Grimdark and complexity but its still solid and flow really well. Units feel more close to fluff. 

Ehem.

The question's been asked, answered, and extensively commentaried.

I think we're done here. I don't like hard closing threads like this, but OR is not a place for rambling discussions about the escapades of your local group nor musings on thinly rumoured content.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.